Can a random system produce an ordered system?

[lindagarrette]

Originally Posted by Biochemist

One interesting corollary: If we think the universe was deterministic since the Big Bang, this means it is the source of all information load. This means the the information load in DNA is miniscule compared to the information load in the Big Bang initial state.

(You notice I had to sneak some biochemistry back into the discussion.)

There must have been almost no information at the time of the Big Bang. It was the first cause. Information was generated from that point on. Complexity (entropy) increases.

[Biochemist]

Originally Posted by lindagarrette

There must have been almost no information at the time of the Big Bang. It was the first cause. Information was generated from that point on. Complexity (entropy) increases.

LG- Help me with this, if you will.

1) Tell me how the Big Bang didn't have the information, but it showed up an instant later. Is this by definition?

2) I could use some training here on complexity theory. My understanding is that entropy increases, but the complexity in each successive subsystem would decrease as the subsystem (like a solar system or a life form) organizes. Are you saying that complexity overall increases with entropy? And are you saying that complexity increases even as the complexity of specific subsequent systems decreases?

[lindagarrette]

Originally Posted by Biochemist

LG- Help me with this, if you will.

1) Tell me how the Big Bang didn't have the information, but it showed up an instant later. Is this by definition?

2) I could use some training here on complexity theory. My understanding is that entropy increases, but the complexity in each successive subsystem would decrease as the subsystem (like a solar system or a life form) organizes. Are you saying that complexity overall increases with entropy? And are you saying that complexity increases even as the complexity of specific subsequent systems decreases?

Complexity is the result of entropy. It might help if you read up on the second law of thermodynamics Here's a simple explanation .http://www.entropysite.com/students_approach.html

[Biochemist]

Originally Posted by lindagarrette

Complexity is the result of entropy. It might help if you read up on the second law of thermodynamics Here's a simple explanation .http://www.entropysite.com/students_approach.html

I am sorry, LG, I am a litte confused. I do understand entropy, and I glanced throu your URL and saw nothing about complexity.

1) When you said complexity is the result of entropy, did you mean that the number on nonlinear processes increases? That seems counterintuitive. When you use "complexity" in ths context, are you discussing a measure of the degree of chaos in the system? That was my initial question.

2) Could you respond to my question in post 12 about the Big Bang? Thanks.

[lindagarrette]

Originally Posted by Biochemist

I am sorry, LG, I am a litte confused. I do understand entropy, and I glanced throu your URL and saw nothing about complexity.

1) When you said complexity is the result of entropy, did you mean that the number on nonlinear processes increases? That seems counterintuitive. When you use "complexity" in ths context, are you discussing a measure of the degree of chaos in the system? That was my initial question.

2) Could you respond to my question in post 12 about the Big Bang? Thanks.

If you understand entropy then you can apply the second law of thermodynamics to answer all of your questions. How do you define complexity? I have no clue what you mean by nonlinear processes in this context.

[infamous]

Originally Posted by pgrmdave

How do we define order, or organization? I have difficulty with those words because they seem to me to be too subjective.

Exactly pgrmdave; I think it would also be wise to define randomness and complexity. If one understands the true meaning of these two words, it becomes evident that they have no relationship one with another. I think some are confusing the term randomness to mean the same thing as complexity. Not so, they mean entirely two different things. Please read my thread in the water cooler; Defining Randomness.

[Biochemist]

Originally Posted by lindagarrette

If you understand entropy then you can apply the second law of thermodynamics to answer all of your questions. How do you define complexity? I have no clue what you mean by nonlinear processes in this context.

LG- Thanks again-

I am still trrying to get you to respond to the questions in my post #12 above (in response to an assertion of yours).

1) Information load- You said the Big Bang had no information load. Were you hypothesiizing that there was no load until after the BB, or were you offering a definition (i.e., a postulate) that BB assumes all information was subsequent to BB. I have never heard this before, and I wanted you to clarify.

2) Complexity- I am attempting to use the terminology of chaos theory and complexity theory in my discussion of complexity. I recognize that post-BB events reflect an increase in entropy. Discrete subsystems (e.g., a specific solar system, earth, etc.) are, I believe, less "complex", in that the degree of nonlinearity (that is the "quantity" of chaos) in the subsystem is lower that the original complexity of the BB. This is the framework I was attempting to build to describe "organized".

The follow-up question is whether aggregate complexity of the universe decreases as well. That is, even though complexity in each subsystem in the universe falls, does aggregate complexity rise, fall or remain constant?

PS- I am deferring all discussion of "randomness" to the thread that Infamous started.
http://www.hypography.com/sciencefor...7643#post27643

[Fishteacher73]

Originally Posted by Biochemist

1) Information load- You said the Big Bang had no information load. Were you hypothesiizing that there was no load until after the BB, or were you offering a definition (i.e., a postulate) that BB assumes all information was subsequent to BB. I have never heard this before, and I wanted you to clarify.

Pehaps I'm just a minimalist, but it seems that there is always someone trying to establish some sort of intelligence outside our own biologically evolved sense to things. To argue whether or not there was an "information load" involved in/before/after the big bang is putting a design on purely natural events. We do not think about whether that rock ponders what kind of noise it will make when it sploshes in the lake nor dreams about becoming a metamorphic rock. That ancient hydrogen atom did not "decide" that it would eventually be part of the molecules of a nose hair, nor did anything else. The results are not random, but there is no design to it other than the natural laws.

[Tormod]

Originally Posted by Biochemist

1) Tell me how the Big Bang didn't have the information, but it showed up an instant later. Is this by definition?

You keep asking for backup on this. However, the Big Bang theory does not try to explain what caused the Big Bang. For all practical purposes, within the Big Bang theory, there was no information stored in it. Anything that happened later was a direct result of the Big Bang.

I think that is what Linda is talking about when she says there was almost no information in the Big Bang - the information from the BB followed after the BB.

You should ask a string theorist what they think about the Big Bang being the beginning of the universe. They have a different answer because they try to avoid the singularity and the quantum fluctuation, so for them the BB did not happen at T=0.

[Biochemist]

Originally Posted by Tormod

For all practical purposes, within the Big Bang theory, there was no information stored in it. Anything that happened later was a direct result of the Big Bang...the information from the BB followed after the BB.

So, you are saying that the information self-generated?

You should ask a string theorist what they think about the Big Bang being the beginning of the universe. They have a different answer because they try to avoid the singularity and the quantum fluctuation, so for them the BB did not happen at T=0.

Thanks tormod- I will pull out some books.